Not at all; I am speaking about property as in land, specifically states rights. While I am, as a conservative, sympathetic and supportive of your earlier point; i.e.,

OK. I would characterize "states rights" into a different category separate from individual rights of life, liberty and property. That said, I am a strong supporter of states rights...as should be anyone that truly understands the US constitution.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camp David

in the case of the Ground Zero mosque, and other notable transgressive examples I alluded to, your position would open up lots of unforeseen circumstances.

Well indeed there will be "unforeseen circumstances." But then some might be good and, yes, some might be bad. But since they are unforeseen we don't really know what they all might be. Furthermore, I don't find this to be a compelling and convincing argument to restrict someone's rights in a case like this. This is way too open-ended. Anyone can argue that any particular thing could have a bunch "unforeseen circumstances" (the unstated implication being that they are all negative) as an argument to restrict rights. Furthermore, what are the possible "unforeseen circumstances?" People being offended?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camp David

Not that I am against it, per se, in the Ground Zero example, but we could augment your position with a few zoning ordinances; five block area around national monuments restricted. This is actually conservative insofar as zoning is concerned, and would prevent the mosque while respecting other urban property rights matters. Matter of fact rural areas impose more restrictive zoning of a mile as a buffer zone around national monuments. That seems a workable plan.

It possibly is a "workable plan" but not necessarily a good one and only seems like a roundabout way to restrict a property owner's rights. I understand and respect the desire and even, arguably, the need for zoning and building code laws that present reasonable limits on property owners as a means to protect adjacent property owner's rights (e.g., building a large, noisy factory next to a residential area.) I also agree that this can be a delicate and sometimes ambiguous charter. However, I believe, we ought to err on the side of protecting and individual's right to use their property as they see fit. I really don't see how building this building in this location truly presents a threat to the rights of adjacent property owners.

I think this issue starts out as both a property rights and religious freedom issue and the (large) burden of proof is upon opponents to demonstrate that allowing this would be a serious, realist and fundamental threat to the real life, liberty and property rights of someone else. I don't believe that burden has been met.

Its hard not to conclude that as far as forming opinions on the proposed Lower Manhattan mosque the horse has left the barn. Nevertheless, 60 Minutes waded in last night and attempted to explain that the so-called Ground Zero Mosque was actually going to be a multi-dimensional community center complete with a restaurant, child care facilities and a pool, along with a two floor Islamic prayer room. They also noted something which has been lost in the subsequent din: the center was endorsed not only by the mayor and the borough president but the local community board who thought it would be a nice addition to a seedy part of town.

i don't think the Muslim community would have glass floors. And there's sure to be a hell of a lot of criticism of a radical design like this, anyway, from all sides. I like it, but I foresee some people using the word "abomination".

It seems that the English (not British) Neo-Nazi Fascist group the EDL (English Defence League) has sent 'supporters' to the NYC mosque protests.

Quote:

Nick Lowles, of Searchlight, the anti-fascist monitoring organisation, said: "The EDL operates on two levels. There are the street activists such as the 120 that demonstrated in Oldham and 100 in London this weekend. But then there is the political agenda driven by a group of leaders whose ideas come from Christian fundamentalism. They are running a dual strategy and they see an international aspect to their goals where the uniting issue is anti-Islam."

Wonder how many other extreme-right fascist or Nazi organizations are driving the protests? I know Gert Wilders was there but he might be in jail soon.

LOS ANGELES More than 30 Southern California religious leaders gathered Friday in downtown Los Angeles to show their support for plans to build a mosque and community center two blocks from ground zero, despite widespread opposition to the project.

The leaders representing more than a dozen faiths issued an open letter at a news conference in front of the Islamic Center of Southern California. They said growing "fear and hysteria" over the New York mosque is un-American and based on a distortion of the facts.

無心The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey

Forgot to include the ICSC which is a part of the Los Angeles Community.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BR

Finally you post a picture with a sign that actually has anti-American scribbles all over it.

The photo is more than several years old. The Islamic Center of Southern California hasn't been Red, White and Blue for over ten years. Drove by there the other day and the sign wasn't there. If you are sure that it's anti--American, PERHAPS YOU WILL PROVIDE A TRANSLATION.

"The View" co-hosts Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar stormed off the set Thursday during a contentious interview with Fox News host Bill O'Reilly.
As the cast debated whether there should be a community center and mosque built in Lower Manhattan, O'Reilly declared that "Muslims killed us on 9/11" to back up his position that it's "inappropriate."
"Oh my God!" Goldberg responded, before uttering a few words bleeped out.
[Rewind: Whoopi's bizarre behavior draws attention]
"Muslims didn't kill us on 9/11?" O'Reilly responded. "Is that what you're saying?"
Goldberg called O'Reilly an "extremist" as several of the co-hosts responded to O'Reilly's statement that "Muslims" -- and not Muslim radicals, extremists or terrorists -- killed "us" on 9/11.

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which represents Tim Brown, a New York City firefighter who survived the 9-11 terrorist attacks, is serving an amended Article 78 petition and memorandum of law today to stop the proposed Ground Zero mosque development - raising important questions about whether Mayor Michael Bloomberg used political pressure to get a city agency to approve the project.

Quote:

"Mayor Bloomberg was very vocal about his support for the mosque but has decided to remain silent - and to ignore requests for critical information - about his involvement in the approval process," said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. "By refusing to provide pertinent information about his involvement in the project, the Mayor is ignoring the very laws that he has sworn to uphold. The people of New York City deserve to know what role the Mayor played - what political pressures were employed to jam this project through? We will continue to aggressively pursue our legal challenge to the mosque and remain hopeful this mosque will never be built on this site."

The lawsuit, which initially just named the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC), has been amended to name as respondents the New York City Department of Buildings (DOB), the owners of the proposed development and project, and Mayor Bloomberg.

The amended suit specifically alleges that "the LPC acted in an arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable manner and allowed the intended use of the Building and political considerations, including pressures from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who appoints the LPC commissioners, to taint what should be a deliberative, unbiased and apolitical process. This was accomplished in violation of procedural safeguards set forth in the New York City Charter and Administrative Code of the City of New York."

Further, Mayor Bloomberg and his office have refused to provide any information requested under the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) - documents that the amended lawsuit contends "will shed light on any political influence or pressure placed during the landmark process."

In addition, the petition also alleges the following:

The LPC abused its discretion by fabricating immaterial standards to justify its disparate treatment of the proposed mosque site and 23-25 Park Place, a virtually identical replica that was unanimously designated a landmark in 2007;
The LPC only paid lip service to the historical importance of the site in light of the damage it suffered on September 11 when the landing gear of one of the hijacked planes crashed into the building, with one Landmarks Commissioner even comparing the significance of the building to a highway guardrail;
According to a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) report, the property is one of just a handful of buildings to suffer major damage on September 11 and still remain standing; and
The proposed development site continues to be occupied without a valid certificate of occupancy or temporary certificate of occupancy, possibly in violation of DOB regulations.

The ACLJ, in addition to seeking to have the LPCs decision overturned, is also requesting an injunction against the DOB from issuing any building permits and disclosure of all relevant information from public officials and agencies named in the suit through FOIL.

The ACLJ represents Tim Brown, a firefighter and first responder, who survived the Twin Towers collapse and lost nearly 100 friends.

The ACLJ filed its initial lawsuit with the Supreme Court of the State of New York in August. It is posted here. The amended complaint is being served today to the respondents. The amended complaint is posted here.

Led by Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, the American Center for Law and Justice focuses on constitutional law and is based in Washington, D.C. The ACLJ is online at www.aclj.org.

Adam Chandler
Writer and editor based in New York City.
Posted: October 14, 2010 12:45 PM

Quote:

In a benumbing turn of events, Abe Foxman, chief of the influential Anti-Defamation League and opponent of Park51 -- the so-called Ground Zero Mosque -- gave a speech this week decrying the rising culture of anti-Islam bigotry. Addressing the Boston chapter of the ADL, Foxman spoke passionately about the need to stem the prevailing tide of intolerance toward American Muslims and to promote interfaith outreach.

Quote:

"It is evident that this surge [of anti-Muslim sentiment] is taking place with greater force now than at a time when one might have expected it, immediately after 9/11. At that time we were worried about an explosion of hatred against American Muslims, particularly after there were a few serious incidents following the terrorist tragedy. As things turned out, anti-Muslim bigotry did not explode. Yes, there were incidents, and even one is too many, but dire predictions did not materialize." Foxman said, adding, "But now, nine years later, we are seeing a surge of incidents. I believe it is related to the broader trends in America -- the lack of civility, the tendency to see enemies all around and the reinforcement of prejudicial views rather than diverse views."

This is, of course, two months after Foxman buckled under the influence of the exact same fervor he now denounces. As the story of Park51 gained its diversionary traction, many in favor of the community center looked to the leadership of politicians and NGOs alike to stand behind the project as an emblem of American strength and pluralism. The Anti-Defamation League, which built a sterling reputation as an advocacy group against racism and discrimination, offered this incoherent moral palliative:

Quote:

"Proponents of the Islamic Center may have every right to build at this site, and may even have chosen the site to send a positive message about Islam. The bigotry some have expressed in attacking them is unfair, and wrong. But ultimately this is not a question of rights, but a question of what is right. In our judgment, building an Islamic Center in the shadow of the World Trade Center will cause some victims more pain -- unnecessarily -- and that is not right."
Foxman's decision was met with consternation in the blogosphere and elsewhere. Fareed Zakaria, the Newsweek writer and CNN host, returned an award given to him by Foxman and the ADL and made an on-air address about the decision:

"I have to say I was personally and deeply saddened by the ADL's stand because five years ago, the organization honored me with its Hubert Humphrey Award for First Amendment Freedoms. Given the position that they have taken on a core issue of religious freedom in America, I cannot in good conscience keep that award... I hope this might spur them to see that they have made a mistake and to return to their historic robust defense of freedom of religion in America, something they have subscribed to for decades and which I honor them for."

In the aftermath of the controversial decision, Foxman did not reconsider his position. An ensuing intolerant mania rode roughshod over the initiative's mission of interfaith goodwill. With the story of Park51 retreating under a cloud of Tea Party witchcraft and midterm election white noise, Foxman's crucial reaffirmation of the need for tolerance arrives at the exact moment when it is least needed. In other news, Jackass 3D, the newest installment in the Jackass film franchise, will premiere this Friday in most major cities.

On her HLN show Thursday, Joy Behar explained to viewers why she walked off "The View" during a heated conversation with Bill O'Reilly earlier in the day.

Quote:

"Today on 'The View,' Bill O'Reilly had a real pinhead moment," she said. "First he said a mosque should not be be built close to Ground Zero here in New York, and then he said this: 'Muslims killed us 9/11.'

"Well I was really angry," Behar said explaining her walk-off. "I thought he was saying something that I construe as hate speech, frankly."

Behar hosted former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura for a discussion on the situation. Ventura did not mince words when it came to O'Reilly or his Fox News colleages.

Quote:

"He's a spineless puke," Ventura said of O'Reilly. "The whole Fox won't have me on. The nighttime guys. I call them the three stooges, and we all know which one's Curly. If Glenn Beck isn't Curly Howard's kid*...I view him and Hannity and them as the Three Stooges, because if they can't intimidate you, they won't have you on."

Truthfully speaking the community center which what it is with a mosque inside should be built not near ground zero. To many horrible memories are there and this can be built somewhere else.I do not trust this Inman and what he represents. Where is this money coming from to build this center? Who really knows.Forget it and Mayor Bloomberg is in it for the money.

Truthfully speaking the community center which what it is with a mosque inside should be built not near ground zero. To many horrible memories are there and this can be built somewhere else.I do not trust this Inman and what he represents. Where is this money coming from to build this center? Who really knows.Forget it and Mayor Bloomberg is in it for the money.

Oh GA this was argued sooooo long ago in this thread. Only thing new is that "Mayor Bloomberg is in it for the money."----source please--you're not suggesting a pay off are you?????

無心The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey

Strips of bacon spelling 'PIG' and 'CHUMP' were found in front of a South Carolina mosque Sunday. In post-9/11 America, pork which is unclean in Islam is a primary form of anti-Muslim protest.

By Patrik Jonsson, Staff writer / October 15, 2010

Atlanta

Quote:

When he first spotted the strange graffiti, Mushtaq Hussain thought it was a juvenile prank: Somebody had used bacon strips on a sidewalk in front of a Florence, S.C., mosque to spell out the words "PIG" and "CHUMP."

But as Mr. Hussain, a board member at the Islamic Center in Florence, gave it some thought, the incident last Sunday seemed less like an ill-advised gag and more like a cunning and cruel affront. "We thought seriously, and we thought, You know, somebody doesn't like us,' " he told WMBF-TV news in Florence.

Nationwide, polls show a growing ambivalence or even anger toward Islam among Americans, which has in part explained the opposition to a mosque near ground zero and mosques elsewhere, as well as the aborted mass burning of Korans by a Florida preacher. But subtler, more psychological attacks against Muslims have also become prevalent, say Muslim groups.

In those attacks, pork which Muslims are forbidden to eat because it is considered unclean is being used as a primary weapon, sent in packages to mosques, invoked in sharply worded letters, or, as in Florence, used to spell out literal messages.

To many experts, pork-laden messages, such as the one delivered in the heart of the barbecue belt last weekend, mirror what appears to be an increasingly conflicted view in America about the impact of Muslim culture on US politics and society.

Like protests such as "Everybody Draw Mohammad Day," some Americans are needling what they perceive to be an over-sensitive Muslim population with acts that to non-Muslims seem relatively tame. In the process, they are exposing the vast difference between what is considered acceptable by the measures of American free speech and by the believers of Islam.

Quote:

"These are not hate crimes, but they're expressions of intolerance, really," says David Schanzer, director of the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security at Duke and the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. "I think a lot of this is generated by a lack of understanding, anger about 9/11, and a great deal of misinformation about Muslims in America and Islam, all of which is in plentiful abundance on the Internet and on blogs."

Pork as a weapon

According to the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), attacks on mosques, cases of Americans burning and even shotgun-blasting Qurans, and personal confrontations on streets have ticked up in recent months. Such claims are hard to quantify, experts say, because more people may simply be reporting incidents that went unheeded in the past.

Anecdotal evidence points to the use of pork as an anti-Islamic protest in recent years. For example:

In September, the US Postal Inspection Service reported that at least four packages containing hate letters and bacon were sent to American mosques from Denver. CAIR is a regular recipient of pork-related hate mail.

In March, two Minnesota high school students allegedly shoved bacon in the faces of several Muslim classmates, according to a CAIR complaint.

In 2007, a Texas farmer held afternoon pig races on Friday the Muslim holy day to protest a proposed mosque next to his farm.

In 2006, a severed pig's head was thrown into a Maine mosque during prayers.

Overseas, 7,000 protesters held a "pork sausage and booze" party in Paris this summer, which was designed as a provocation against Muslims and a protest against the perceived Islamicization of France.

On the Internet, bloggers are invoking pork to incite Muslims. In a recent column on the conservative Town Hall.com, Mike Adams, a criminology professor at the University of North Carolina, proposed several pork-related pranks against the "ground zero mosque," including "building a large bomb filled with bacon grease. Dubbed the 'Mother of All Bacon,' or MOAB, this bomb would not hurt anyone but would permanently defile the location so that no one could worship there."

Quote:

"The problem is you could look at [such incidents] and say, 'Oh, well, it's just some idiot doing something stupid,' but I think it should be viewed against the overall rise of anti-Muslim sentiment in society," says Ibrahim Hooper, director of CAIR. "Right now, the whole pork theme is quite popular with the Muslim haters out there."

Weariness with Muslim sensitivities

The pork attacks come amid tensions in the US about how to talk about Islam in popular culture. A Seattle artist who proposed then withdrew a call for a "Everybody Draw Mohammad Day" in protest of a censored "South Park" episode, recently left her job, moved, and changed her name on the FBI's advice after radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki issued a fatwa for her death, the New York Post reported last month. Islam forbids the depicting of the Prophet Mohammed.

In light of such stories, as many as 1 in 5 Americans are incensed that they have to tip-toe around Muslim sensibilities in a country where the First Amendment guarantees nearly all speech, including hateful words and acts.

So is pork a crime?

The bacon graffiti this weekend prompted CAIR to call on the FBI to investigate what they called a "desecration" that took place as part what the organization says is a broader pattern of intimidation being waged against Muslims around the US.

So far, police in Florence say the incident doesn't meet the criteria for a hate crime, but they are investigating the incident as a case of harassment.

Critics of Islamic culture in the US see CAIR's concern about the bacon attack as part of "stealth jihad" in which US-based Islamic groups demand that Muslim sensibilities be protected at all costs, all in a larger effort to make the US "Sharia compliant," abiding by the edicts of Islam.

Quote:

"If Christians are expected to endure crucifixes submersed in jars of urine being represented as art, then Muslim Americans had better develop an appreciation for the attributes of the society in which they live and don thicker skins," writes a blogger on PipeLineNews, which posits itself as a group of investigative journalists focusing on the culture wars and national security.

American views of Islam slip

The share of Americans who have a "favorable view" of Islam has dropped from 41 percent five years ago to 30 percent today, according to an Aug. 24 Pew Forum on Religious and Public Life survey. Concern about Islam's influence on US society has entered the national political arena, as well, shown by a different Pew poll that found that 1 in 5 Americans believe President Obama is a Muslim an 11 percent jump since a year ago.

Quote:

"A lot of it has to do with the economy. There is a sense that life is unstable. The American public is under siege," John Green, director of the Bliss Institute of Applied Politics at the University of Akron, told the San Francisco Chronicle this summer. "So, foreign threats are magnified. In a lot of people's minds, there is this sense that this religion is associated with violence."

Experts like Mr. Schanzer fear that protests like the bacon graffiti in Florence can backfire.

Quote:

"Besides it being inconsistent with American values, I think it's damaging to our security," he says. "There's no doubt that one of the best ways to prevent homegrown terrorism is to get good information from the Muslim community, and that is made much more difficult when Muslims feel there's a climate of intolerance in the country."

If free speech is such a great thing then is this all it can come up with?

Surely the people who can only spell out 'chump' in pork outside a mosque are merely morons? It's not exactly the Agora in Athens is it?

I would support Free Speech if it elevated debate and intellectual prowess and understanding. Unfortunately we get bad spelling and streaky bacon.

Another question: what should the recipients of this legal abuse do? Obviously violence is out of the question - though if you tried that near the mosque in my hometown the matter would get sorted with awesome clarity - so what to do?

Maybe Muslims could respond with spelling things out in things the cro-magnons find offensive> Problem there is that that would have to be things connected to Islam so they would then have the Catch-22 of 'installing Shari'a' or 'taking over the US' so it would have to be something non-Musli that they find offensive.

But what?

Maybe they could burn Bibles...but then Muslims respect and love Jesus and the Bible so that wouldn't work....what to do?

Any suggestions?

Badmouth McDonald's? Slag off John Wayne? I want to exercise my right to free speech....

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad

If free speech is such a great thing then is this all it can come up with?

Surely the people who can only spell out 'chump' in pork outside a mosque are merely morons? It's not exactly the Agora in Athens is it?

I would support Free Speech if it elevated debate and intellectual prowess and understanding. Unfortunately we get bad spelling and streaky bacon.

The acts of defacing a church, temple, mosque or synagogue isn't considered free speech. It comes under one of the Federal Hate Crime laws.

Quote:

TITLE 18 PART I CHAPTER 13

§ 247. Damage to religious property; obstruction of persons in the free exercise of religious beliefs
(a) Whoever, in any of the circumstances referred to in subsection (b) of this section
(1) intentionally defaces, damages, or destroys any religious real property, because of the religious character of that property, or attempts to do so; or
(2) intentionally obstructs, by force or threat of force, any person in the enjoyment of that persons free exercise of religious beliefs, or attempts to do so;
shall be punished as provided in subsection (d).
(b) The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) are that the offense is in or affects interstate or foreign commerce.
(c) Whoever intentionally defaces, damages, or destroys any religious real property because of the race, color, or ethnic characteristics of any individual associated with that religious property, or attempts to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (d).
(d) The punishment for a violation of subsection (a) of this section shall be
(1) if death results from acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, a fine in accordance with this title and imprisonment for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death;
(2) if bodily injury results to any person, including any public safety officer performing duties as a direct or proximate result of conduct prohibited by this section, and the violation is by means of fire or an explosive, a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more that 40 years, or both;
(3) if bodily injury to any person, including any public safety officer performing duties as a direct or proximate result of conduct prohibited by this section, results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, a fine in accordance with this title and imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both; and
(4) in any other case, a fine in accordance with this title and imprisonment for not more than one year, or both.
(e) No prosecution of any offense described in this section shall be undertaken by the United States except upon the certification in writing of the Attorney General or his designee that in his judgment a prosecution by the United States is in the public interest and necessary to secure substantial justice.
(f) As used in this section, the term religious real property means any church, synagogue, mosque, religious cemetery, or other religious real property, including fixtures or religious objects contained within a place of religious worship.
(g) No person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for any noncapital offense under this section unless the indictment is found or the information is instituted not later than 7 years after the date on which the offense was committed.